Hi Steve...
Well, my backup windows is something like 10 12 hours, size of a full
backup is near of 2TB and incremental per day not bigger than 20G.
My idea is to perform a full backup on thursday (to keep a copy off
the office on weekend) and incremental/differential during the week.
OK, new thing, I've TWO TS3100, so I'm going to make a copy of the
tape on another library, but I think this is not a problem with my
backup windows as it will be copied from library to library without
prodcution server involved, right?
Thanks again folks...
--
Flávio do Carmo Júnior aka waKKu
Florianópolis/SC - Brazil
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Steven Langdale<Steven.Langdale AT cat DOT com>
wrote:
> LAN Free will be poor with this kind of data.
>
> What is your actual backup & restore requirement? What's your backup
> window, how much data and how much changed data per day.
>
> Steven
>
> Steven Langdale
> Global Information Services
> EAME SAN/Storage Planning and Implementation
> ( Phone : +44 (0)1733 584175
> ( Mob: +44 (0)7876 216782
> ü Conference: +44 (0)208 609 7400 Code: 331817
> + Email: steven.langdale AT cat DOT com
>
>
>
>
>
> Flavio Junior <billpp AT GMAIL DOT COM>
> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
> 01/08/2009 17:10
> Please respond to
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
>
>
> To
> ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [ADSM-L] TSM 5.5 using LANFree backup really "slow"
>
>
>
>
> Caterpillar: Confidential Green Retain Until: 31/08/2009
>
>
>
> Hi David,
>
> Well FileServer is exact what i'm backup ;/
> A lot of files with sizes between 100k and 20Mb.
>
> So, there is nothing that can be done to improve this, at least for
> 100GB/h?
> Just to point my head toward right direction.. LANFree backups or LAN
> backups.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
>
> Flávio do Carmo Júnior aka waKKu
> Florianópolis/SC - Brazil
>
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 12:02 PM, David
> McClelland<david.mcclelland AT networkc.co DOT uk> wrote:
>> What is the nature of the data that you're backing up here? Large
>> files/objects or lots of smaller files/objects? The classic
> recommendation
>> for SAN backups direct to tape is that it's best used only for larger
>> objects (eg database backups, TDPs or disk image etc) to ensure optimal
>> streaming to tape. Backing up a file server with millions of individual
>> small files direct to tape won't always produce a great overall
> throughput
>> figure.
>>
>> /David Mc
>> London, UK
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 1 Aug 2009, at 15:37, Flavio Junior <billpp AT GMAIL DOT COM> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Steve, thanks for answering...
>>>
>>> Yeah, the destination is tape, i see on StorageAgent console the
>>> connection to server and opening tape, during the backup I see the
>>> bytes increasing on "Backup by LANFree: " (but, this value is ALWAYS
>>> lower than the value of normal backup... i don't know if this is
>>> normal).
>>> VALIDATE LANFREE node policyset shows me that the node is capable to
>>> LANFree backups.
>>>
>>> During the backup (using webclient interface) I can see two speeds,
>>> well.. A screenshot of backup report is at link:
>>> http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9278/backupz.jpg
>>>
>>> The screenshot is in portuguese but I think is easy to you guess what
>>> is each value...
>>> Time: 5:45 Hours
>>> Size: 181 Gb
>>> No compression
>>>
>>> Rede == Network
>>> Agregada == Aggregate, combination... (not sure how TSM show it)
>>>
>>> Ok, this is what I have... If need more info just let me know.
>>>
>>> Thanks again.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Flávio do Carmo Júnior aka waKKu
>>> Florianópolis/SC - Brazil
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Steven Harris<steve AT stevenharris DOT
>>> info>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Flavio
>>>>
>>>> Is the destination of your backup pool tape? Have you confirmed with
>>>> VALIDATE LANFREE on the server
>>>> Are you seeing a "proxied by" message in the client log to indicate
> that
>>>> the
>>>> storage agent is in use?
>>>> Is the *network* path configured as 1Gb - I'm suspecting you have a
> LAN
>>>> backup and that the lan path has issues.
>>>>
>>>> HTH
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>> Steven Harris.
>>>> TSM Admin, looking for work, Sydney Australia
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Flavio Junior wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm here, again, asking for help :)
>>>>> More I read, more doubts I have.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm now implementing a TSM For SAN setup, to performance comparison
>>>>> with my currently LAN backup.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll describe my scenario below, any doubt's feel free to ask me:
>>>>> - 2 Production nodes using RHEL 5.3 connected to SAN
>>>>> - 1 IBM DS4700 storage with 14 FC disks (13 raid5 + 1 hot-spare)
>>>>> - Each node have a emulex dual-port HBA
>>>>> - 2 Brocade TotalStorage fiber switches, with coherent zonings
>>>>> - Library is a IBM TS3100 LTO4 SAN, with only one drive
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, i'm using TSM with LAN backups for a week, the transfer rate
> comes
>>>>> among 60~80GB per hour.
>>>>> The tape has a nominal write speed of 120MB/s that says me 430GB/h,
>>>>> ok.. this is a *nominal* speed, I was expecting something near
>>>>> 300GB/h, good enough for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> For these tests I've configured TSM Server on node1 and TSM Client on
>>>>> node2. Each node has 6 1Gbps NIC's, 4 to public network 2 for
>>>>> cluster-heartbeat + backups.
>>>>> With this setup I've got, as said above, 60~80GB/h.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I decide to setup TSM for SAN.. Download a lot of docs/books and
>>>>> start reading/doing.
>>>>> I end up with:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Fabric zoning changes, isolating a HBA port on each dual-port cards
>>>>> for
>>>>> nodes
>>>>> - Installed StorageAgent on node2
>>>>> - Installed TSM Client on node2
>>>>> - - Configured the client to connect on storageagent
>>>>> - Redefine all my TSM Server setup
>>>>> - - Make Library as shared=yes, configure storage agent as a server,
>>>>> configure path, configure datawritepath=lanfree and so on...
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, time to backup.
>>>>> And, for my surprise i got only ~500MB per minute.. I thought it very
>>>>> strange.. I've no idea what is the problem, I've tried with
>>>>> compression and without, DATAREADPATH=LAN and SAN, VirtualMountPoints
>>>>> or Physical ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anybody have an idea the reason of that bad transfer rate?? The
>>>>> servers are Samba Servers, with all kind of file and all size
>>>>>
>>>>> As I said before, I'm really new with TSM so is really possible that
>>>>> I've misconfigured something :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, thanks in advance, and any help will be appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Flávio do Carmo Júnior aka waKKu
>>>>> Florianópolis/SC - Brazil
>>>>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database:
>>>>> 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09 05:58:00
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
|
